Pistorius and Utterback (1997)

Question 1

goal of the paper

Answer 1

to draw attention to the proposed multi-mode framework as a basis for assessing the interaction among technologies in a broader sense than pure competition.

Question 2

hypotheses

Answer 2

1. the interaction between technologies should be viewed in a broader sense than mere competition.
2. a multi-mode framework provides a much richer setting for assessing the interaction of two or more technologies.

Question 3

competition

Answer 3

the interaction between technologies, also described as ‘attack’ and ‘defense’. this term implies a confrontation between two entities, in this case technologies. however, the paper agues that the interaction among technologies should be viewed in a wider sense than mere competition.

Question 4

multi-mode framework

Answer 4

allows for various permutations of positive and negative interactions between interacting technologies, providing a much richer setting for assessing the interaction and the subsequent plotting of offensive and defensive strategies. it has been successfully applied in biological and organisational ecology and can be equally useful when applied to the dynamics of technological interaction.

Question 5

four unidirectional nodes of interaction

Answer 5

1. an emerging technology can either have a positive or negative influence on the growth of a mature technology.
2. a mature technology can either have a positive or negative influence on the growth of an emerging technology.

Question 6

three modes of interaction

Answer 6

derived from the combination of the four unidirectional modes.
1. pure competition
2. symbiosis
3. predator-prey

Question 7

pure competition

Answer 7

where each technology exerts a negative influence on the other’s growth, is a very prevalent case in an innovation context. competition is often embodied in substitutes, which have been recognised as a powerful force in competition.

Question 8

symbiosis

Answer 8

where two technologies have positive
reciprocal effects on one another’s growth rate. it is the ‘association of two different organisms living attached to each other or one within the other to their mutual advantage’. it is closely related to mutualism and commensalism.

Question 9

mutualism

Answer 9

‘the doctrine that mutual dependence is necessary for social well-being’,

Question 10

commensalism

Answer 10

where ‘an organism lives harmlessly with or in another and shares its food’

Question 11

predator-prey

Answer 11

used to describe the dynamics between two technologies where one technology (the “predator”) poses a threat to the other (the “prey”), potentially leading to changes in market dominance, innovation strategies, and technological advancement.

Question 12

sailing ship effect

Answer 12

a concept used to describe a scenario in which a mature technology coexists with and is somewhat impacted by an emerging technology, but the mature technology fails to recognize the potential threat posed by the emerging one.

Question 13

predator-prey strategy

Answer 13

A (predator) should not actively deter B (prey) since B’s growth enhances A’s growth. A’s growth will eventually kill B, but A should reap all the benefits it can from B’s growth. A may even consider taking active steps to enhance B’s growth. however, if this situation is perceived as pure competition, A would forego the enhancing effect that B’s growth has on A.